MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2611853024 · doi:10.21468/scipostphys.3.5.034

Entanglement Entropy in Lifshitz Theories

2017· article· en· W2611853024 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Temple He, Javier M. Magán, Stefan Vandoren

Bibliographic record

VenueSciPost Physics · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstitut Périmètre de physique théoriqueOntario Ministry of Research, Innovation and ScienceNederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk OnderzoekGovernment of CanadaSimons FoundationU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsQuantum entanglementExponentScalar fieldPhysicsEntropy (arrow of time)DiscretizationMathematical physicsScalar field theoryCrossoverStatistical physicsMathematicsQuantum mechanicsMathematical analysisQuantumQuantum gravity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We discuss and compute entanglement entropy (EE) in (1+1)-dimensional free Lifshitz scalar field theories with arbitrary dynamical exponents. We consider both the subinterval and periodic sublattices in the discretized theory as subsystems. In both cases, we are able to analytically demonstrate that the EE grows linearly as a function of the dynamical exponent. Furthermore, for the subinterval case, we determine that as the dynamical exponent increases, there is a crossover from an area law to a volume law. Lastly, we deform Lifshitz field theories with certain relevant operators and show that the EE decreases from the ultraviolet to the infrared fixed point, giving evidence for a possible c c -theorem for deformed Lifshitz theories.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.255 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations40
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSciPost PhysicsSame topicBlack Holes and Theoretical PhysicsFrench-language works237,207